The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 08/09/2012 S�'TYol�ane p Valle � Y Spokane Valley Planning Commission Agenda City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. August 9, 2012 6:00 p.m. L CALL TO ORDER IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IIL ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 14, 2012, June 28, 2012 VL PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject that is not on the agenda VIL COMMISSION REPORTS VIIL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: L Findings —CTA-02-12, Proposed Amendments to 19.120 Permitted Use Matrix 2. Findings —CTA-Ol-12, Proposed Amendments to 19.120 Allowing animal shelters in the Corridor Mixed Use zone. B. NEW BUSINESS: No New Business X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF BILL BATES -CHAIR 70HN HOHMAN,CD DIRECTOR FRED BEAULAC SCOTT KUHTA,PLANNING MGR,AICP JOHN G.CARROLL RUSTiN HALL RoD HIGGINs STEVEN NEILL DEANNA GRIFFITH,SECRETARY JOE STOY-VICE CHAIR WWW.SPOKANEVALLEY.ORG CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Review Meeting Date: August 9, 2012 Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent �old business ❑new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation FILE NUMBER: CTA-02-12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Findings and Recommendation-Amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19120 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated text amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), Chapter 19120 (Permitted and Accessory Uses) matrix affecting numerous uses in commercial,mixed use, office, and industrial zones. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A106, SVMC 17.80150 and 1930.040 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: Planning Commission conducted a study session on June 28, 2012, a public hearing on July 12, 2012, and deliberated on July 26, 2012. BACKGROUND: Staff presented CTA-02-12 to the Planning Commission at a study session on June 28, 2012. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the amendment on July 12, 2012. During deliberations on July 26, 2012, the Planning Commission voted to recommend amendments to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code which are outlined in E�ibit B. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation to City Council STAFF CONTACT: Christina Janssen-Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: A. Planning Commission's Findings and Recommendations B. Permitted and Accessory Uses matrix 1of1 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION August 9,2012 The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval. A. Background: 1. The development regulations in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)were adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. 2. The proposal is a city initiated code text amendment to SVMC 19120 Permitted and Accessory Uses matrix. 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 12, 2012,with deliberations continuing on to July 26, 2012. The Planning Commission approved the following amendments to SVMC 19.120; a. City Center: Remove the category of"City Center"as there is no longer any land within the City zoned City Center. b. Appliance sales/service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Community Commercial zone. The size and scale of typical appliance stores is compatible with the Community Commercial zone. c. Auction House: Proposed as an allowed use in the Light Industrial zone due the availability of structures large enough to accommodate this type of business. d. Manufacturin�: Relocate all manufacturing categories from their current alphabetic location in the code to a general"Manufacturing" section within the code for easier navigation. No changes are being proposed to the locations where these uses can locate within the City. e. Automobile/truck/RV/motorc.�paintin�, repair,body and fender works: Proposed as an allowed use with conditions in the Community Commercial zone. An appropriate use in this zone provided that it be located within an enclosed structure. £ Barber/beaut, s�p: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office zone as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. g. Bicvcle sales/service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office zone as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. h. Boat sales/service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Corridor Mixed Use and Light Industrial zones where other automobile sales are currently allowed. i. Brewery,micro: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. A growing trend, these small tap breweries typically serve the neighborhoods where they are located. j. Buildin�Su�lv&Home Improvement: The Corridor Mixed Use zones have significant vacancies and would be appropriate for this type of use. Other uses already permitted in the CMU zone with a similar NAICS classification include hardware stores and greenhouse/garden centers. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for CTA-02-12 Page 1 of 4 k Candy& Confectionarv_: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office and Office zones as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. 1. Cemetery and crematories: Proposing that these uses be separated and that crematories be contemplated separately due to potential issues with crematories in residential zones. Proposing crematories as an allowed use in the Community Commercial, Regional Commercial, Corridor Mixed Use, Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial zones. m. Church,temple,mosque, syna�o�ue and parsona�e: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office zone. Small congregations are regularly locating in spaces which were formally small retail or of�ce spaces. These uses are allowed in all other zones within the City with the exception of the industrial zones. n. Clothes,retail sales: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Smaller, boutique type establishments appropriate to serve the surrounding neighborhood. o. Dru� Store: A dated term,proposing to rename this item"Pharmacy", a more widely used term and relocate it alphabetically within the code. p. Dwellin�, townhouse: Proposing to remove this from the Neighborhood Commercial zone where residential uses are not allowed. This change corrects an error in the code. q. Entertainment/recreation facilities,indoor: Proposed as a permitted use in the Light Industrial zone and with a Conditional Use Permit in the Heavy Industrial zone. These uses,which include indoor soccer centers,batting cages, etc. are growing in popularity and typically locate in large,warehouse type facilities commonly found in industrial areas. r. Essential Public Facilities: Proposed as Regional Siting in the Corridor Mixed Use zone. This amendment would make it possible for the County to consider parcels zoned CMU when contemplating uses including,but not limited to,hospitals,regional transportation facilities,inpatient facilities, etc. s. Exercise facility/g,vm/athletic club: Proposed as an allowed use in the Office zone. Small scale �tness facilities that locate in strip commercial or office space such as Curves, Anytime Fitness, or the like. These smaller facilities do not generate traffic or noise beyond what would typically be expected in the Office zone. t. Hobb, S�p: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office and Office zones as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. u. Home furnishin�s,retail sales: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. These smaller,boutique style stores serve the neighborhoods where they are located. v. Market, outdoor: Proposing to change this use from requiring a Temporary Use Permit to an outright permitted use in the Mixed Use Center, Corridor Mixed Use, Community Commercial, Regional Commercial,Parks and Open Space, and Light Industrial zones. Outdoor markets are growing in popularity and often are functional for longer than the 6 months the Temporary Use Permit currently allows. w. Mobile food vendors: Allowed with conditions in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. These small businesses,which serve the neighborhood where they are located,would need the permission of the property owner and the Health Department. x. Music store: Proposed as an accessory use in the Garden Office zone as this would be compatible with specialized training, such as a music school. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for CTA-02-12 Page 2 of 4 y. Office & Computer sales: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Smaller,neighborhood scale businesses as opposed to "big box" office retail(Office Depot). z. Photographic Studio: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office and Office zones as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. aa. Print Shop: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Small scale businesses serving the neighborhoods where they are located. bb. Radio/TV broadcastin�studio: Proposed as an allowed use in the Light Industrial zone due to the large equipment required for this type of business. cc. Recreational vehicle sales and service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Corridor Mixed Use zone where other types of automobile sales are currently allowed. dd. Specialized trainin�/learnin� schools or studios: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office zone, these types of businesses which can include dance,martial arts,music, or other similar uses do not generally produce traffic or noise which would be harmful to nearby neighborhoods. ee. Taxidermv: Proposed as an allowed use in the Corridor Mixed Use zone. Taxidermy is a low intensity use generating low traffic volumes. A. Findings: The Planning Commission finds the proposed code text amendment to be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Growth Management Act and the City's Comprehensive Plan; GMA Policies 1. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) provides that each city shall adopt a comprehensive land use plan and development regulations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. Ci .t�pokane Valley Goals and Policies 2. The City of Spokane Valley has adopted goals and policies consistent with the GMA. a. Goal LUG—3: Transform various commercial business areas into vital, attractive, easily accessible mixed use areas that appeal to inventors, consumers and residents and enhance the community image and economic vitality. b. Policy LUP—42: Integrate retail developments into surrounding residential areas with attention to quality design and function c. Policy LUP—81: Allow commercial,residential and recreational uses in conjunction with permitted uses in Of�ce designated areas. The Planning Commission finds the proposed code text amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. Conclusions: The proposed City initiated, code text amendments to SVMC 19120 are consistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends approval to the City Council of the City initiated code text amendments to SVMC 19120 (Permitted and Accessory Uses matrix) as proposed. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for CTA-02-12 Page 3 of 4 Approved this 9te day of August,2012 Bill Bates, Chairman ATTEST Deanna Griffith,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for CTA-02-12 Page 4 of 4 d td7 O 'a 0 R y R R C � C Schedule of Permitted Uses y � o �'� •� '� '� Q � ,, � o � o v � v R v 0 � > Reference Conditions y Appendix 19-A .a v -a v v � � � � o � y v rn v N U w� ' y v � rnE E E rnE Y R � x Q N O N . R '� �y O O O N O R G- � N I � � � � � � z �U U� C9 O zU UU �U av� s 711 Adult entertainment establishment S S Chapter 19.80 SVMC 453 Adult retail use establishment S S Chapter 19.80 SVMC 311 Agricultural processing plant,warehouse P P �� n�.,..�rr.., ..��r�,.r„�;„„ $ � 481219 Airstrip,private P P 62191 Ambulance service P P R P P P P P � 54194 Animal clinic/veterinary P S P P P SVMC 19.60.040(B)(1) 311613 Animal processing facility P S S S S S S 112 Animal raising and/or keeping S S Excluding NAICS 1122, Swine.SVMC 19.40.150. 81291 Animal shelter P P 31161 Animal slaughtering and processing P 45392 Antique store P P R P P P � 448 Apparel/tailor shop P P R P P P P P � 443111 Appliance sales/service P P R P P A A Only if manufactured/ � assembled on premises. �� n.,.,i��..,.o�.., ..��r�,.r,�r�.,,. � g I 45392 Art gallery/studio P P R P P P P P � �� n�.,h�ir„i�.,ri.., .,��t�,.r,,.;„„ $ � 333 Assembly—heavy P 334 Assembly—light P P P P P P P P P 623312 Assisted living facility P P P P 4533 Auction house P P P P � 4533 Auction yard(excluding livestock) P P 1152 Auction yard,livestock P 3361 Automobile assembly plant P 922 Automobile impound yard P P <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 19-1 441 Automobile/light truck sales and service P P P P � 4853 Automobile/taxi rental P P R P P P P P � 811121 Automobile/truck/RV/motorcycle painting, S S P P P Enclosed structure only. repair,body and fender works SVMC 19.60.050(B)(3). 4413 Automotive parts,accessories and tires P P P P P P � 31�g1 ❑��o., .,.,��,.r� ..��r�,.r��.�.,,. � R � 445291 Bakery,retail P P R S S P P P A A Floor area limited to 10% of Gross Leasable Floor Area(GLFA)not to exceed 1,000 sf. � 52211 Bank,savings/loan and other financial P P R P P P P P P P institutions � 8121 Barber/beauty shop P P R PA P P P P P I �gl ❑�rro., oh��i,��.,,.r.,,�.,��r�,.r��.�.,,. $ $ P P P P P P 721191 Bed and breakfast P P P 11291 Beekeeping,commercial P S S S 11291 Beekeeping,hobby SVMC 19.40.150(C) � 4511 Bicycle sales/service P P R P P P P P P P 336611 Boat building,repair and maintenance P P � 441222 Boat sales/service P P P P � 4512 Book/stationery store P P R P P P P P 3121 Bottling plant P P � 71395 Bowling alley P P R P P � 722 Brewery,micro P P R P P P P P P P � 3121 Brewery,winery and/or distillery P P R P P P P I �� o.,.,.,,,,,, ..��a.,,.��.�,,,. R R � 4441 Building supply and home improvement P P P P � 445292 Candy and confectionery P P R P P P P P P P � 71399 Carnival,circus T T � T T T T 3219 Carpentershop P P P P 561740 Carpet and rug cleaning plants P P 811192 Carwash P P S P P P P SVMC 19.60.040(B) <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 19-2 S okane Valle Munici al Code 7132 Casino P P R P P � 454113 Catalog and mail order houses P P P P P P P 72232 Catering services P P R P P P P � P P P P 8122 Cemetery�^�'^�^�.,��'^��^^ p � 451112 Ceramics shop P P R P P P P � � rh,.,,,�,..,i,,, ��a.,,.��.�.,,. R I P P P P P P 813 Church,temple,mosque,synagogue and P P R P P P P P � parsonage 4481 Clothes,retail sales P P R P P P � 49312 Cold storage/food locker P P 6113 College or university P P R P P P P � 517 Communication service/sales P P R P P P P P � �34� r,.,,,,,,��„�,.,��,.,,�,. „��a.,,.��.�,,,. R R R R I S S S S S S 921—922 Community facilities S S � S S S S S S S S See zoning districts for � conditions. P P P 8134 Community hall,club,or lodge P P R P P P P P � P P P 6232 Community residential facility(6 or less residents) P P P 6232 Community residential facility(greater than 6 residents,no more than 25) 56173 Composting storage/processing,commercial P 54151 Computer services P P � P P P P P P P � 2373—238 Contractor's yard P P P P P 623 Convalescent home,nursing home P 44512 Convenience store P P A A P P P P P �g r,.�.,,,.��,..,,,,�,,, ,.ii., ��a.,,.��.�,,,. � � I Crematories P P P P P � P P P P P P 6233 Day care,adult P P R A P P P A A � C C C C P P 624410 Day care,child(13 children or more) P P A A P A A P P P P P P 624410 Day care,child(12 children or fewer) P P R A A P P P A A � 4521 DepartmenWariety store P P R P P � nn�� R R R �4 R R R R R I 19-3 <revdate>(Revised 3/12) � 8123 Dry cleaners P P R A P P P P 812332 Dry cleaning,laundry,linen supply plant, P P commercial 3211114 Dry kiln P S S S 814 Dwelling,accessory apartments SVMC 19.40.100 814 Dwelling,caretaker's residence S S S SVMC 19.60.060(B)(1) � P P 7213 Dwelling,congregate P P R P P P P P 814 Dwelling,duplex P P � P P P 814 Dwelling,multifamily P P R S S SVMC 19.60.020(B) P P P P P P 814 Dwelling,single-family P P S S SVMC 19.60.020(B) � P P P 814 Dwelling,townhouse P P R R 334—335 Electrical/electronic/computer component and P P P P P P P system manufacturing/assembly I � Cmorrnln}h�nflc nfln niif�n}�irinn g g � 713 EntertainmenVrecreation facilities,indoor P P R P P P P C � 7139 EntertainmenUrecreation facilities,outdoor P P R P P P P 5323 Equipment rental shop P P P P P 8113 Equipment sales,repair,and maintenance P P P P P � 7222 Espresso/latte retail service P P R P P P P P P P � R R R R R R 92 Essential public facilities R R R R R R R Chapter 19.90 SVMC � A A 71394 Exercise facility/gym/athletic club P P R A P�4 P P P A A I �'� Cvnlnci.�om niif�n}�irinn g 493190 Explosive storage P P P P P P P P 814 Family home,adult P P P P P P P P P P 814 Family home,child P P P P 441222 Farm machinery sales and repair P P P 112112 Feed lot P 311211 Feed/cereal/flour mill P P I �r� co.r;i��o..., .,��r�,.r,�.�..,, g � 81292 Film developing P P R A A P P P � 44313 Film/camera sales/service P P R A A P P P <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 19-4 S okane Valle Munici al Code 4531 Florist shop P P R A A P P P P � � c,.,.,�,.,.,��,.�... ��a.,,.��.�„�� I 44521 Food sales,specialty/butcher shop/meat P P R S P P SVMC 19.60.040(B)(3) � market/specialty foods 484 Freight fonvarding P P 447 Fueling station P P P A P P P P 81221 Funeral home P P P � C��..,�r��.o.,, .,��r�,.r��r�..,. � � I � r_.,.,,,,.,,�,,, ��r.,,.��.�,,,. � � I 453 Gift shop P P R A A P P P A � S S S S S S 71391 Golf course P S P P Chapter 22.60 SVMC C C C C C C 71391 Golf driving range/training center P C S P P Chapter 22.60 SVMC 49313 Grain elevator P P 44422 Greenhouse,nursery,garden center,retail P P P P P P 1114 Greenhouse,nursery,commercial S S P P SVMC 19.60.050(B)(3) 4451 Grocery store P P R S P P SVMC 19.60.040(B)(3) � 44413 Hardware store P P R S P P SVMC 19.60.040(B)(3) � 562211 Hazardous waste treatment and storage S S SVMC 21.40.060 4812 Heliport P P 4812 Helistop C C C C P 45112 Hobby shop P P R P PA P P P � 442 Home furnishings,retail sale P P P P P � 6221 Hospital P P P P P R R R R R R 622210 Hospital,psychiatric and substance abuse R R R R R R R R 622310 Hospital,specialty P P R P P P A A � 7211 Hotel/motel P P R P P P P � 312113 Ice plant P P � '^^�^'"��,- '`'�,'""'"� g I 45322 Jewelry,clock,musical instrument assembly, P P R A P P P P P � sales/service 81291 Kennel,indoor kennel,doggie day care facility S S S S P P See zoning districts for conditions. 19-5 <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 54138 Laboratories(Bio Safety Level 2) P P P 54138 Laboratories(Bio Safety Level 3) P P P 54138 Laboratories(Bio Safety Level 4) P P � 62151 Laboratories,medical and diagnostic P P R P P P � 44419 Landscape materials sales P P P P P A A A 812310 Laundromat P P A P P P P � 4453 Liquor store P P R A A P P � 561622 Locksmith P P R A A P P P 3211 Lumbermill,sawmill,shingle mill,plywood mill P 33271 Machine shop P P P I � nn�,.h�..oi.,,�,.h�..or, ..��r�,.r��.�..,. $ $ 236115 Manufactured home fabrication P P S S S S S 814 Manufactured home park SVMC 19.40.130 45393 Manufactured home sales P P P � Manufacturinp � 336411 Aircraft manufacturinp P � 33522 Appliances manufacturinp P P � 32412 Asphalt planUmanufacturinp P � 31181 Bakerv products manufacturinp P P � 33591 Batterv rebuildinp/manufacturinp P P � 339994 Broom manufacturinp P P � 325 Chemical manufacturina P � 3342 Communications epuipment manufacturinp P P P P � 339 Cosmetic and miscellaneous manufacturinp P P � 322226 Emerv cloth and sandpaper manufacturinp P P � 32592 Explosive manufacturinp P � 3253 Fertilizer manufacturinp P � 311 Food product manufacturinp/storaae P � 337 Furniture manufacturinp P P � 315 Garment manufacturinp P P � 32591 Ink manufacturinp P <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 19-6 S okane Valle Munici al Code 333 Machine/machinerv manufacturinp P P � 327 Manufacturinp.nonmetallic metal products P P � 3391 Medical and laboratorv instrumenVapparatus P P P manufacturinp Mineral product manufacturinp,nonmetallic P � 32411 Petroleum and coal products manufacturinp P � 32511 Plastic and rubber products manufacturinp P � 314991 Rope manufacturinp P P � 325212 Rubber reclamation,manufacturinp/fabrication P � 33995 Sipn manufacturinp/repair P P � 32561 Soap and cleaninp compound manufacturinp P � 31411 Textile manufacturinp P P � 56292 Tire.recap and retread manufacturinp P � 321 Wood product manufacturinp P P � � nn�..��r�,.r,�.�..,, or�ii�,..,,or�i.,r,.,��,.r� g � I 453998 Market,outdoor P� P� � P� P� �P P� � 621498 Massage therapy P P R P P P P P � 3116— Meatffish canning,cutting,curing and smoking P P 3117 �-� nn,.,��,..,i.,,,,�i.,h,...,�,..,,� „�i.,..,..,..,�� R R R ��r� � 42345 Medical,dental,and hospital equipment P P P P supply/sales 6214 Medical/dental clinic P P R P P P P P � 621 Medical/dental offce P P R P P P P P � 332 Metal fabrication P P 332 Metal plating P 332 Metal processes,hot P nn�,,....,i,.,.,��,.�,,, ��r.,,.��.�,,,. .,ii�,. R I 212 Mining P 722330 Mobile food vendors S S S S S S S S S S S SVMC 19.60.010(H) � T T T T T T 236115 Model home units 19-7 <revdate>(Revised 3/12) � 71211 Museum P P R P P P P � 45114 Music store P P R A A P P P � A A 561 Office P P R P P P P P P P � 45321 Office and computer supplies P P R A P P P P P 999 Off-road recreational vehicle use P P 1113 Orchard,tree farming,commercial P P 32211 Paper/pulp mills P � 4859 Park-and-ride facility P P R P P P P P 522298 Pawnshop P P P P � 812 Personalservice P P R P P P P P � 45391 Petshop P P R A P P P � 44611 Pharmacv P P A P P P P P I �� Do}rnloiim�n(1 n �I nrn(liin}c m niif�n}�irinn � � 54192 Photographic studio P P R P,4�4P P P P � �� 326199 Plastic injection molding,thermoset P 326199 Plastic injection molding,thermoplastic P P P P P P 326199 Plastic injection solvent molding P � 491 Post office,postal center P P R P P P P P P P 221 Power plant(excluding public utility facilities) P � 56143 Printshop P P R A P P P P P P 323 Printing,reprographics,bookbinding services, P P commercial � 48849 Public pay parking garage/lot P P R P P P � S S S S S S 221 Public utility distribution facility S S R P P P P P P P P See zoning districts for conditions. � S S S S S S 237 Public utility transmission facility S S S S S S S S S S S See zoning districts for conditions. 71399 Racecourse P P P P 711212 Racetrack P P � 5151 Radio/TV broadcasting studio P P P P P P 4821 Railroad yard,repair shop and roundhouse P <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 19-8 S okane Valle Munici al Code 7212 Recreational vehicle parWcampground C S SVMC 19.60.060 44121 Recreational vehicle sales and service P P P � 56292 Recycling facility S S S P P P P P P P P 51511 Repeater facility P P P P P P 7222 Restaurant,drive-in P P P P P P 7222 Restaurant,drive-through P P A C P P P P 722 Restaurant,full service P P R A P P P P P P � 452—453 Retail sales P P R A P P P A A Limited to items � manufactured on the premises. 71399 Riding stable C P P 33122 Rolling mill P �1-4�&1 �iag R � � �'� DiiL.L.orronl�m�}inn niif�n}�irinn/f�hrin�}inn g I P P P P P P 6111 Schools,public and private,K through 12 P P R P P P � P 6114 Schools,professional,vocational and trade P P R P P P P P P � schools Showroom P P P P P P 4533 Secondhand store,consignment sales P P R P P P S SVMC 19.70.010(B)(9) � � �i�rv� iif�n}iirinrvlr�� g g I rm�mao�mm Jrr 33995 Sign painting shop P P P P P �1 � � 56292 Solid waste recycling/transfer site S S S SVMC 19.60.060(B) 6116 Specialized training/learning schools or P P R P P S P P Adaptive reuse of � studios existing structures only. No expansion allowed. P P 49319 Storage,self-service facility P P P P P P 493 Storage,general—outdoors S S S S P See zoning districts for conditions. Tank storage,LPG above ground S S S S S S S S SVMC 21.40.060 � 213112 Tank storage,critical material above ground S S SVMC 21.40.060 213112 Tank storage,critical material below ground S S S S SVMC 21.40.060 3161 Tanning,curing of hides and skins P 19-9 <revdate>(Revised 3/12) � 7224 Tavern P P R P P P � Taxidermy P P P � S S S S S S 5172 Telecommunication wireless antenna array S S S C S S S S S Chapter 22.120 SVMC � C C C C C C 5172 Telecommunication wireless support tower S S S C S S S S S Chapter 22.120 SVMC I �� Tov}�lo m niif�n}�irinn � g � 711 Theater,indoor P P R P P P 711 Theater,outdoor P P P P Ir�g� T�.,. ,,,�. .,,�.., ��a�,.��.�,,,, g � S S S S S S 5179 Tower,ham operator S S S C S S S S SVMC 19.40.110(A) 221119 Tower,wind turbine support C S S S S S SVMC 19.40.110(B) � 4851 Transit center P P R P P P P P C 7213 Transitional housing 441222 Truck sales,rental,repair and maintenance P P 445—447 Truck stop P P 81142 Upholstery shop P P P P P 49311 Warehousing A S P A P P Adaptive reuse of existing structures.No expansion allowed. � � R � 56292 Wrecking,recycling,junk and salvage yards C S SVMC 19.60.060(B) P Permitted Use A Accessory Only R Regional Siting T Temporary Permit S Conditions Apply C Conditional Use Permit <revdate>(Revised 3/12) 19-10 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: August 9,2012 Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent � old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin.report � pending legislation FILE NUMBER: CTA-01-12 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Findings and Recommendation — Amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: A privately initiated text amendment proposing to amend Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19120 to allow animal shelters in the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) zone. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A106; SVMC 17.80150 and 1930.040 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: Planning Commission voted 7 to 0 on July 26, 2012 to approve a privately initiated amendment allowing animal shelters in the CMU zone subject to special conditions. BACKGROUND: The proposal is to modify Appendix 19-A, Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 19120 to either allow animal shelter(s)in the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Zone outright or to allow Animal Shelters as a permitted use subject to the following special conditions; 1. Animal Shelter owned and operated by a public entity; 2. No outside dog runs; 3. Soundproof structure to meeting requirements of WAC 173-600; and 4. Comply with parking, landscaping and signage requirements in SVMC Title 22. On July 26, 2012, the Planning Commission conducted a study session and a public hearing to consider the request. Following public testimony and deliberations, the Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposal to allow Animal Shelters in the CMU zone with special conditions. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation to City Council. STAFF CONTACT: Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: A. Planning Commission's Findings and Recommendations B. Planning Commission's Recommended Code Text Language CTA-01-12 RPCA(Findings and Recommendation) Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT A FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION August 9,2012 The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval. Background: 1. Spokane Valley development regulations were adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. 2. The proposal is a privately initiated code text amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (svMC) I9.IZO �appena�x I9-a�. 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 26, 2012. The Planning Commission approved the following amendment to SVMC 19.120 and 19.60.080(B)(6). Findings: The Planning Commission�nds the proposed code text amendment to be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Growth Management Act, Countywide Planning Policies and the City's Comprehensive Plan; GMA Policies 1. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) provides that each city shall adopt a comprehensive land use plan and development regulations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. Countvwide Plannin�Policies 2. The Countywide Planning Policies (CWPP) are based on principles developed through a lengthy citizen participation process. One of the guiding principles coming out of that process was the importance of protecting neighborhood character. For most citizens, neighborhood character is one of the primary ingredients in their perceived quality of life. It is the intent of the CWPP to maintain neighborhood character and prevent neighborhoods from suffering the negative effects of growth. Ci .t�pokane Valley Goals and Policies 3. The City of Spokane Valley has adopted goals and policies consistent with the GMA and adopted CWPP. a. Goal LUG-9: Encourage the development of Mixed-use areas that foster community identity and are designed to support pedestrian,bicycle and regional transit. b. Policy LUP-9.2: The mix of land uses allowed in either the Corridor Mixed-use or Mixed-use Center designation should include: i. A full range of retail goods and services including grocery stores, theaters/entertainment, restaurants,personal services and specialty shops; ii. Public/quasi-public uses iii. Commercial uses that require large land uses but have low employment density and are auto-dependent, such as lumber yards, plant nurseries, warehouses and auto dealerships, should be prohibited from either Mixed-use category. c. Goal EDG-1: Encourage diverse and mutually supportive business development and the expansion and retention of e�sting businesses within the City for the purpose of emphasizing economic vitality, stability and sustainability. d. Policy EDP-1.8: Encourage local organizations engaged in business retention, expansion and recruitment. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for CTA-01-12 Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT A e. Goal EDG-5: Collaborate with governmental agencies and the business community to promote a sustainable, strong, diverse and healthy regional economy. The Planning Commission finds the proposed code text amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. Conclusions: The proposed privately initiated code text amendment to SVMC 19120(Appendix 19-A)is consistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends approval to the City Council of proposed privately initiated, code text amendments to SVMC 19120 (Appendix 19-A) and 19.60.080 as attached. Approved this 9te day of August,2012 Bill Bates, Chairman ATTEST Deanna Griffith,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for CTA-01-12 Page 2 of 2 ATTACHEMENT B Planning Commission's Recommendation: � � x w O R y R R C 'a C Schedule of Permitted Uses y � o �'� •� '� '� Q � ,, � o � o v � v R v 0 � > Reference Conditions y Appendix 19-A .a y -a v v � E E E o E y v rn v � N M � N U X C N � � �E E E OI E � R J 2 d' d' d' d' � � Z �U U 7 U' O Z U U U d'U a Vl S N 81291 Animal shelter S P P SVMC 19.60.080(B)(6) � P Permitted Use A Accessory Only R Regional Siting T Temporary Permit S Conditions Apply C Conditional Use Permit 19.60.080 B. Supplemental Permitted Use Regulations 6. Animal shelter(s)shall comply with the followinp provisions; a. Shelter must be owned and operated by a public entity; b. No outside runs allowed: c. Human supervision must occur in anv outdoor areas: d. Located alonq an arterial; e. Compliance with noise standards for a commercial noise source as identified bv WAC 173-60-040 has been demonstrated bv the applicant: and f. Comply with all standards of SVMC Title 22. CTA-Ol-12 code text amendment—Planning Commission's Recommendation Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. June 14, 2012 L CALL TO ORDER Chair Bates called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance IIL ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF BILL BATES -CHAIR JOHN HOHMAN,CD DIRECTOR 70HN G. CARROLL-ABSENT SCOTT KUHTA,PLANNING MGR,AICP RUSTIN HALL -ABSENT CARY DRISKELL,CITY ATTORNEY ROD HIGGINS KELLY KONKRIGHT,DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY STEVEN NEILL LORI BARLOW, SR.PLANNER MARCIA SANDS—RECUSED MARTY PALANIUK,PLANNING TECHNICIAN JOE STOY—VICE CHAIR HENRY ALLEN,DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER DEANNA GRIFFITH,SECRETARY Commissioner Neill moved to excuse Commissioners Carroll and Hall from the June 14, 2012 meeting which was passed unanimously. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Higgins made a motion to approve the June 14, 2012 agenda as presented. This motion was passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Neill made a motion to approve the April 12, 2012 minutes as presented. This motion was passed unanimously. VL PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VIL COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Bates reported he attended the ribbon cutting at the new Greenacres Park. VIIL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Planning Manager Kuhta stated a flyer had been handed out which announced a Planning Short Course which is being offered in Walla Walla June 28, 2012. He also discussed the City is considering sponsoring a Short Course in conjunction with Eastern Washington University which will probably be held October. Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 1 of 10 IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. Unfinished Business: Continued deliberations of the Shoreline Draft Goals and Policies The Commission returned to their continued deliberations of the Shoreline Draft Goals and Policies (G&P). Commissioner Bates reminded the Commission there is still have a motion on the floor is to accept the SAG G&P, Sr. Planner Barlow stated the strategy is once the commission competes its deliberations, staff will bring back a strike-through version of the G&P which will show all of the policies the Commission has made. Ms. Barlow stated Commissioner Bates had requested a list of what had been discussed and what had not and Ms. Barlow informed the Commission she would demonstrate in her presentation which policies had already been discussed so far to date. Ms Barlow began with saying at the last meeting Commissioner Carroll had asked staff to look at policies 411 and 5.12 to look at separating out the standards for public and private development. Policy 411 has been modified to read: • Recognize the importance and uniqueness of the Spokane River Centennial Trail to the City of Spokane Valley, the region, and the state, Future trail development on private ro e including trail extensions, new access points, whether public or private, shall be designed to have the least adverse impact. Future trail develo�ment on �ublic �ro�erty shall meet the same objective, but shall also incorporate enhancement and restoration measures where a�ro�riate. Staff have now separated out the private property, so the trail extensions are designed with the least impact, and new statement which addresses trail design on public property to address enhancement and restoration measures where appropriate. Commissioner Neill asked it this would obligate the City to do something if it did not have the money to do so. Ms. Barlow replied the regulations would define what `where appropriate' would mean and if the project met those guidelines then the project would be required to do so. Commissioner Stoy asked if any of the trail is on private property,Ms. Barlow stated it is all trail on state property, Policy 5.12 has been changed to read: • New public �r�shoreline uses and developments should be planned and designed to attract the public to the waterfront, new �rivate shoreline uses and develo�ment shall be planned and desi�ned to attract the �ublic to the waterfront with exce�tions as allowed bX WAC 173-26-221 (4)(d). Ms. Barlow stated some of the language is state law and through the update process the City will be developing a public access plan. This will mean having a plan which will layout where the City like to have public access to the river rather than looking at it on a project by project basis. Ms. Barlow reminded the Commission the City does not have a lot of land which can be developed on the river which would be able to provide river access. Based on the previously accepted shoreline inventory, this policy will have very little impact. Ms. Barlow said this policy addresses buildings along the river and the other policy which is affected is in economic development portion of the Goals and Policies,the other policy is based on the Centennial Trail only. Ms. Barlow shared some information she had received from Riverside Area Manager Chris Guidotti, who felt it the higher standards for a public entity could impede their ability to do improvements to the Centennial TraiL Mr. Guidotti shared the Parks department as every other government agency has a limited budget and he was concerned placing a higher standard on a public entity could make it more difficult for them. It is his opinion the requirements within the law at this time, which ensure No Net Loss of ecological function and also allow conditions as warranted to be placed on projects through the permitting process that these requirements are Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 2 of 10 unnecessary and was also concerned how this would be implemented through the development regulations. He said the primary impact be to the Centennial Trail and any improvements or expansions. Mr Guidotti noted his agency was a resource protection agency and its primary purpose is to protect that resource specifically. He feels that the suggested changes were unnecessary. Ms. Barlow shared the changes have been brought at the request of the Commission however staff has not taken a position on this change. Mr. Kuhta interjected staff might have a recommend if asked. Ms. Barlow said staff feels the change to Policy 4.11 is unnecessary, there are other policies in place that would take care of this issue. The change does show stewardship toward the shoreline and it could be an `encourage' statement instead. Chair Bates asked if the Commission wanted this language retained. The change had been proposed by Commissioner Carroll and the Commission wanted to allow him to look at it since he had made the request. Commissioner Stoy stated he would like to allow for a little bit of fle�bility, and `should' would allow flexibility and still help make it look nice. Commissioner Higgins asked if there were places along the trail which would have access from private property. Mr. Kuhta stated as an example there are new apartments being built along the river would be able to develop an access to the traiL It owners would have to work with the state in order to get it taken care of, however he understood the intent and original language as it was would cover everything. The decision is change "shall to should" in Policy 4.11 and discuss it again when it comes back later. Policy 5.12 is fine as it is. Returning to the rundown of the Goals and Policies from the last meeting beginning at Goal 5. Goal 5 and those policies under: Commissioners had no issues with any listed under 5, other than what had already been discussed Goal 6 and supportive policies: All Commissioners stated they were good with what was under this goal at this time. Goal 7 and supporting policies: Commissioner Neill stated in Policy 7.1 he would prefer the changes which are being proposed Centennial Properties. Develop a Restoration Plan that will identify degraded areas and provide a framework for restoration efforts to improve the existing ecological function and provide a mechanism for �oint�ublic and�rivate mitigation of��r�T��a�'�'� ��a ��-��'�'��future development while providin�incentives for future development for miti�ation. Ms. Barlow shared that Mr. Kisielius is suggesting no change in this policy. Mr. Kisielius stated it would be inconsistent with the statute. Commissioner Bates said he felt the language should be left alone. Ms. Barlow explains the proposal suggests a mechanism for joint public and private mitigation, however generally speaking City would not look to partner to mitigate the impacts of private development unless the development was providing a greater public purpose. Ms. Barlow stated the Restoration Plan is a requirement of the Act and is defined in the guidelines. The City is required to identify the areas that need to be restored, or provide opportunities for restoration, it is required to identify different methods to accomplish the restoration, also look to accomplish restoration efforts to increase the ecological functions. The guidelines state all projects have impacts. Ms. Barlow said that looking at Centennial's changes it is not clear as to what they are trying to accomplish. She also said there is nothing in the revised language which obligates the City to write regulations which might be cumbersome. Commissioner Neill asked if in the original version prohibits what Centennial is trying to recommend. Ms. Barlow stated no there was not, except it does suggest incentives which the original policy does not. Mr. Kuhta stated their policy is poorly written, the original is clearly written and he would recommend the more clearly written Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 3 of 10 policy. Commissioner Neill shared he was find with that suggestion as long s the original does not prevent the City from doing as Centennial suggested. Goal 8 and the supporting policies: Commissioner Higgins stated Goal 8 which has been modi�ed to read - Goal SMP 8: Assure no net loss of ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes within wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, geologically hazardous � areas and frequently flooded areas. €�Assure no net loss of ecological function within these critical areas. Ms. Barlow stated the word should really be `assure' and it will be changed. Commissioner Neill asked about Policy 8.5, the final sentence.. `Do not allow structural shoreline stabilization that will result in a net loss of ecological function'... does the last sentence make for liability for the City. Ms. Barlow said no, she did not think so. Mr. Neill said the sentence before that states `we will allow shoreline stabiliaation to protect structures under these circumstances. The regulations will define when structures can be built. What the sentence is trying to say is there could be stabilization which could have an impact in a net loss,however when the SMP is done and one complete package there are many checks and balances to ensure there is little to no loss of ecological function. The Act does recognize that everything, even preferred uses, do have some impact to the shoreline. Ms. Barlow said Mr. Carroll was concerned the sentence would not allow any structural stabilization of any kind, however that is not the case. Ms. Barlow reminded the Commission to focus on the `net' portion of the requirement of No Net Loss. This process goes back to the baseline, the other pieces of the SMP which allow for a build-up of surplus above the baseline of ecological function so uses and development which will be allowed and we know will have an impact, and even with our restoration plan we will experience a net loss of ecological function. Mr. Konkright said Mr. Kisielius would not result in liability to the city, this is a stated goal is not a stated law. The SMP is not going to allow a shoreline stabilization which would result in a net loss in eco function. Mr. Konkright stated this goal does not add obligation which is not already in the state law. Ms. Barlow stated this Ecology's position on this policy is to protect primary structures only. Goal 9 and supporting policies: This goal and policies most is verbatim from the WAC. Commission had no comment on these policies Goal 10 and supporting policies: Policy 10.4 - Maintenance and improvements — Commissioner Carroll wondered who determines what past adverse impacts are,who made them and who will be responsible for taking care of them. This language was suggested by Mr. Kisielius. All shoreline requests have a to go through the permitting process and they must be reviewed to see if they are in line with the WACs. After the review based on the conditions on that site, there would be a coordinated effort by City staff, DOE, and other possible reviewing agencies, which could include DFW, DNR, would collectively determine what impacts there are, who is responsible for them and who will take care of the clean up and maintenance of them. Goal 11 and supporting policies—Commissioners had no issues with these. Goa112 and supporting policies- Policy 12.13 regarding the gravel pits, Give priority to industrial uses in the following order: Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 4 of 10 • First priority is give to water—dependent industrial uses • Second priority is given to water-related industrial uses • The e�sting legally permitted gravel pits are considered water dependent uses. The Commission discussed how the gravel pits were water dependant uses and how other policies state until such time the pits enters their reclamation phase the SMP will not be regulating them. Commissioner Higgins said he would like to have the last line deleted. There was more discussion regarding how the gravel pits have evolved and how the City would be dealing with them. The Commission agreed and directed staff to remove the last line of the policy referring to the gravel pits. At that point the Planning Commission determined they no longer had any more recommended changes or issues with the draft SMP Goals and Policies. Ms Barlow stated at the next meeting, June 28, 2012, she would return with a strike through version of the Goals and Policies for a final review, then the Commission would be able at that time to make a recommendation to the City Council. The Commission agreed with Ms. Barlow and thanked her for her time and diligence. The Commission took a break at 7:12 p.m. and returned at 7:21 p.m. B. New Business: � i. Training Session: Zoning Code Commissioner Higgins expressed concern that the other two Commissioners were not present, Planning Manager Kuhta explained that the other two members, having been on the Commission for some time already had a fair understanding of the code and this would be a basic review for the newer members. Planning Manger Kuhta began by explaining the Commission had received a copy of Title 19, a copy of 19120 the Permitted Use Matrix and a copy of the current zoning map. He talked about the City's zoning map and explained the coloring on the zoning map were representing different zoning districts. He also said the colors for the different zones were standard across the country. Mr. Kuhta talked about the different residential zones. Then Mr. Kuhta displayed the Spokane Valley Municipal Code on the screens to show the Commission how to find the zoning code on line. Commissioner Neill asked if R-1 zoning district lots are larger, R-4 is smallest single family residential zoning district. Mr Kuhta confirmed this was correct and then discussed the other zoning districts names and approximate locations on the map. Mr. Kuhta explained the Residential Zone Dimensional Standards table, 19.40-1 and the Commercial Development Standards table 19.60-1. Commissioners had questions and some comments of their own: • Commissioner Neill has a question in regard to the R-1 zoning, one acre lots — Mr. Kuhta explained this was done in the early years of the city in response to neighbors from the Ponderosa and Rotchford Acres areas of the City disturbed by Spokane County having rezoned them to six units per acre before incorporation. Mr. Kuhta said those are the only two areas where this zoning would be allowed and the City will not be allowing any new areas of this zoning district. • Commissioner Bates confirmed that a quite few of the residential areas are aoned R-2 in the City. Mostly what is south of 16`'' and east of University. The greater part of the City is zoned R-3. Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 5 of 10 • Mr. Kuhta talked about the density getting tighter as it gets closer to the business corridors and transportation. • Commissioner Neill talked about the development at 16th and Dishman-Mica, which is a good example of zero lot line development. Mr. Neill mentioned how well the development has integrated itself well into the neighborhood, which had been an older neighborhood with some of the larger lots surrounding it. • Commissioner Stoy stated that the set back is measured from the property line not from the curb line. • Commissioner Stoy asked the garage height requirement (step back requirement). Mr. Stoy thought there was a requirement for an oversiaed building to be setback an additional five feet from the property line. Mr. Kuhta responded that this requirement was not in the code, but it was probably something which should be looked at. • Commissioner Higgins asked about a specific building which is in direct violation of some restrictive covenants of the neighborhood. Mr Higgins was concerned no one was enforcing the covenants. Mr. Kuhta then discussed Home Owners Association (HOA) covenants —these are private and not enforced by City. The covenants are enforced by the HOA and are considered a civil matter between parties. • 19120 Schedule of Permitted Uses, or the Permitted Use Matrix. Mr. Kuhta explained the Use Matrix and how it works and the symbols used in the matrix P = Permitted, S = Permitted w/Specific Conditions, A = Accessory to Permitted Use, C = Conditional Use Permit, T = Temporary Use, Blank=Not Permitted • Mr. Kuhta explained there are some regulations which are involved which are somewhat `buried' in the code. For example 19.40.090 Accessory Structures. B. The combined building footprint of all accessory permanent structures in residential zoning districts shall not exceed 10 percent of the lot area. This does not include attached garages, this only pertains to detached structures. Mr. Kuhta explained this was not unique to the City, many jurisdictions have these kinds of requirements. Spokane County has similar restrictions. These allow air and space to remain on the properties. Commissioner Neill asked if a covered dog run would fall under this de�nition, and Mr. Kuhta said no. The accessory structures are also required to meet are the development standards and setbacks. • Commissioner Bates asked if the standards are changed often, were they in-line with the rest of the county? Mr. Kuhta said the standards are not changed very often and they are in line with the surrounding jurisdictions however Spokane County calculates the setbacks differently. Commissioner Stoy added mostly cities setbacks are smaller, up to three feet, but only on a garage. • Discussed the standards in commercial zones. There are no minimum or maximum lot coverage, however there are requirements for landscaping, drainage, parking for example. The lot could not be completely covered however. • Discussed Conditional Use Permits (CUP). A use may be permitted in a particular zoning district but requires more scrutiny before it can be allowed. A CUP requires hearing before the Hearing Examiner who will apply special conditions,typically. • Mr. Kuhta explained that a Variance allows for some relief from some zoning standards on the property. A variance is not granted just because the property owner would like to not have to comply with the development standards. There are very specific criteria that must be met, B. The variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 6 of 10 topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the land use zone in which the subject property is located,� C. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to th�e property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located,� D. The special circumstances of the subject property make the strict enforcement of the provisions of this code an unnecessary hardship to the property owner; • The Commission discussed Administrative Exceptions (AE). Mr. Kuhta explained how an AE is different than a Variance. It is just a request for small amounts of deviation of code provisions: o any dimensional requirements less than one foot o setbacks= 10% or less of required setback o building heights =25% of ma�mum `� o lot area=25% of required of lot area o building coverage =25% of maximum coverage all cover look at the zone, • Commissioner Stoy discussed with other members a person looks at the Use Matrix, looks at what is allowed, the special conditions are in the far right column in the reference the code sections. A person would then go to those code sections to review the special conditions which must be taken into consideration before the use will be allowed. • Commissioner Bates asked about manufactured homes, he remembered a discussion at City Council about Manufactured Home Parks but could not recall the specific discussion. He also stated he did not recall where manufactured home allowed. Mr. Kuhta explained the City cannot restrict manufactured housing. It is allowed in any residential zoning in the City. However the subject of discussion at Council was manufactured home parks, the parks which lease a spaces and the park is owned by someone else. The citizens were worried that the owner of the park would be able to sell the park and lots, the new owner would be able to displace the renters leaving them with having to find a place to move their manufactured home to. Commissioner Bates asked if the development south of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, CPA-OS-12, was a manufactured home park Mr. Kuhta responded no, it was a development and the owners own their own lots. The Commissioners had no other questions so they moved on to a new subject. ii. Discussion—Planning Commission Rules of Procedure: Deputy City Attorney Kelly Konkright began the discussion regarding the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure (ROP) stating the suggestions have come from the meeting on May 7, 2012 with Mr. Stan McNutt. Mr. Konkright stated he will be covering several of the changes being proposed in the ROP: Section 13 - Statement of Ethics / Code of Conduct. He shared this section had been added to help the Commissioners identify and avoid possible conflicts of interest. Mr. Konkright stated the language mirrors the City Council's Governance Manual, but has changed a little to pertain to the Commission. Section 13(B) It states no Commission member maybe involved in a contract with personal benefit with the City. Mr. Konkright stated this is in a state statute but the attorney's office has placed it in the ROP so the Commissioners are aware of it. Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 7 of 10 Section 13(C) Conflict of Interest. This outlines what could possibly be considered a conflict of interest. Mr. Konkright stated the most novel provision is the Professional Conflict 13(C)(1)(iii) and one that allows them to recuse themselves if they have a professional conflict in which the Commission member's employers is requiring the recusal based in a real or perceived conflict. These sections out line which types of conflicts the Commission may come in contact with. Mr. Konkright stated the next section is how to deal with a conflict of interest should one arise. Commissioner Bates asked to discuss 13(C)(1)(i) "Engaging i. engaging in a transaction or activity which impairs or would to a reasonable..." if you testify before the council, took a position on something that could come before the Planning Commission and then you taken a stand and made up your mind. Mr. Bates wanted to know if this was something similar to what this policy was referring to. Mr. Konkright stated it would be very possible for that to be regarded as a conflict if that particular situation should come up. Should that situation arise then the Commission member should talk to the city attorney or deputy city attorney in order to see how to handle it. Mr. Konkright continued with 13(D) Other Prohibited Acts, attendance. In order to make the ROP consistent with the SVMC the attendance policy has been changed to three or more consecutive regularly schedule meetings. It had previously said six in a calendar year. Commissioner Bates asked to confirm this same as the City Council attendance policy. Mr. Konkright stated he did not know, but did know it was consistent with the SVMC. Commissioner Bates would like it to also say six times in a 12-month period. He stated in doing research many cities are more restrictive then Spokane Valley is or some cities use a percentage instead. Commissioner Higgins asked if asked if they would be excused or unexcused absences. Commissioner Bates stated he felt they should be excused or unexcused. He shared he felt that the attendance was important and everyone needed to be at the meetings. Mr. Konkright stated he could add the language to the ROP however, he wanted to point it is not consistent with the current code, and if the Commission felt strongly about it, then he would suggest that the SVMC be changed so that they match. The Commission discussed how to excuse and absent member. The Chair will explain the reason for the absence and if there is no obj ection, then the member will be excused. Mr. Konkright explained how he changed the wording to if there is an objection then the Chair will make the motion to excuse. Mr. Konkright also shared that if the Commission member has recused themselves during a meeting due to an actual or perceived conflict of interest then there is no need to excuse them. Commissioner Bates would like language added to specify the member must remain for the rest of the topics on the agenda. Mr. Konkright agreed to try and prepare language which would specify such,but felt it was laid out clearly in the proposed language already. Commissioner Stoy asked about voting, item 7(C) states a member cannot vote on a matter unless they have attended the public hearing or have listened to the recordings all public hearings. Mr. Stoy wanted to know if the member only needed to listen to the recording for the public hearing or all recordings that pertain to the subject which have been missed? The Legal Staff stated that not all subjects the Commission members make decisions on require a public hearing. Commissioner Higgins stated he felt it should be both the public hearing and any study sessions related to the subject. City Attorney Cary Driskell commented this is not a requirement for the City Council. Commissioner Bates asked how Councilmembers get up to speed on current issues. Mr. Driskell stated he was not telling the Commission to not make it a requirement, he was just stating it is not a requirement the City Council places on themselves. Mr. Driskell stated there is an expectation the members will exercise a certain diligence about the work they do and subjects they need to explore. Commissioner Higgins stated he was informed when he became a Commission member he would have to listen to several recordings before he could participate in his first vote. Mr. Driskell replied this was only formalizing a fact,instead of lea�ing it as just an expectation of performance. Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 8 of 10 Chair Bates stated when the revised draft returned the members could discuss this subject again, however for right now, the language will stand as it is. Mr. Konkright continued with 13(D)(8) engaging in any meeting which violates the Open Ppublic Meetings Act. Mr. Konkright stated this had been puts in the rules after the discussion at the May 7, 2012 special meeting. 8. states that Engaging in any meeting that violates the Open Public Meetings (OPMA). OPMA strictly forbids any meeting of a quorum of the Commission during which any city business is discussed. The OPMA provides that Commissioners may (a) meet informally in less than a quorum and discuss City business, and (b) meet in a quorum if City business is not discussed, but Commissioners are encouraged to be mindful that such meetings risk creating an appearance of violation of the OPMA when such meetings can be avoided. Mr. Konkright told the Commission members if a meeting occurs that is, or would seem to a reasonable person to appear to constitute a violation of the OPMA, the Commissioners involved in the activity should publicly disclose the nature of such activity at the next Commission meeting. If possible, the Commissioner(s) may consult the City Attorney for advice on whether the meeting violates the OPMA. Mr. Konkright stated that the SMVC 18.10.020(D) under removal, it states a commission member can be removed for three unexcused consecutive regular meetings. He said this was the code provision in which the legal office was trying to match the rules of procedure to. Commissioner Stoy asked if this meant study sessions and Mr. Kuhta replied that the Planning Commission did not have study sessions outside of their regular meetings so all meeting would be considered in this provision. Commissioner Bates asked about 1810.050(G) Make periodic written and oral reports to the city council addressing work in progress and other significant matters relating to the City; Mr. Bates wanted to know if this is where the members would be allowed to make a minority report to the Council, if there had been a split vote on a subject, could be included in the Planning Commission findings. Mr. Konkright felt it would not apply to a minority report and the Council would have to change the code in order to allow for something like this. Commissioner Bates asked Planning Manager Kuhta how the code would get changed. Mr. Kuhta shared if there was an inconsistency which was identi�ed though the Planning Commission process then the Planning Department would discuss it with the City Attorney's office to determine if it should go to the City Council for and amendment to correct the inconsistency. Mr. Konkright then asked if the members had any questions, otherwise he would make the suggested changes requested by the Commission and return with an update draft. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Higgins requested to have a discussion of the Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2, Land Use placed on the Planning Commission advanced agenda. Mr. Higgins stated after review of the Comp Plan Chapter 2 during the annual updates and the concerns over CPA-OS-12 and the dimensional standards surrounding this amendment,he felt that this chapter should have a very in-depth look at what is in there. He also shared he felt this would be a large scale project and would like to begin the discussion of it soon in order to bring the discussion to the City Council for approval for review. Planning Manager Kuhta agreed to put on the Planning Commission advanced agenda for discussion. Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 9 of 10 XI. ADJOURNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Bill Bates, Chairperson Deanna Griffith,PC Secretary Date signed Planning Commission Minutes 06-14-12 Page 10 of 10 Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes June 28, 2012 L CALL TO ORDER Chair Bates called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance IIL ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF BILL BATES -CHAIR SCOTT KUHTA,PLANNING MGR JOHN G. CARROLL CARY DRISKELL,CITY ATTORNEY RUSTIN HALL LORI BARLOW, SR.PLANNER ROD HIGGINS CHRISTINA JANSSEN,ASSISTANT PLANNER 70E STOY—VICE CHAIR MARTY PALANIUK,PLANNING TECHNICIAN STEVEN NEILL,ABSENT DEANNA GRIFFITH,SECRETARY Commissioner Carroll made a motion to excuse Commissioner Neill from the June 28, 2012 Meeting. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Higgins made a motion to approve the June 28, 2012 agenda as presented. This motion was passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Stoy made a motion to approve the July 7, 2011 minutes as presented. The vote on this motion was six in favor and one abstention by Commissioner Higgins who stated he was not voting because he was not on the Commission at the time of this meeting. Commissioner Stoy made a motion to approve the March 22 and May 7, 2012 minutes as presented. This motion was also passed unanimously. VL PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VIL COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioners had nothing to report. VIIL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Planning Manager Kuhta shared the Council has advertised to fill the position vacated by Commissioner Sands, who had resigned as of the last meeting. He said the position has been advertisement has been scheduled to close on Friday June 30th and Mayor is going to make the recommendation at the July 3, 2012 Council meeting. Mr. Kuhta also shared the City had Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 1 of 7 filled the Building Official position with an internal candidate, Doug Powell, but still has not hired a new public works director as of yet. Mr. Kuhta also discussed items on the advanced agenda, which include updates to the Permitted Use Matrix and a privately initiated text amendment by Spokane County to allow animal shelters in the Corridor Mixed Use zoning district. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. Unfinished Business: i. Deliberations of the Draft Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Goals and Policies. Sr Planner Lori Barlow commented to the Commissioners at the last meeting they had completed their review of the Draft SMP Goals and Policies and had directed staff to return to with a strike-through version for one final review and approval going forward. Ms. Barlow stated all of the changes the Commission requested are listed in this draft version of the goals and policies. Ms. Barlow then had a discussion regarding the disposition of the current motion on the floor and a making a new motion. Commissioner Carroll stated he had a couple of comments. He shared he felt Policy 1.4 did not read quite right now that it had been changed. Ms. Barlow stated it has been drafted so it captures all of the interests. SMP 1.4 Public Interest and Property Rights � �Balance the interests ��in attaining the goals of the Shoreline Master Program, in a manner consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations on the regulation of private properry. Commissioner Carroll said when you read it in a different light, it still does not seem to read right, he was willing to go along with it, but thought maybe it should have a couple of words, like `all interests' or `balance the community interests'. Ms. Barlow said the intention if the policy is to make sure that it is understood the City is protecting the rights of the public in attaining the goals of the SMP. It also assumes some familiariry with the Shoreline Master Act. Still Commissioner Carroll thought the sentence did not read correctly, saying it `leaves you hanging.' Commissioners thought `community' did not seem to fit. `Balance the interest of the community in attaining the goals...." Commissioner Higgins stated he thought Mr. Kuhta's suggestion of `all' `Balance all interests in attaining the goals....." Commissioner Bates likes the word community. The Chair asked the Sr. Planner if she felt it made sense. She said she felt the intent is clear and the word `community' or `all' does not change the concept of the statement. Commissioner Hall asked a clarifying question regarding the next step to the council. After the recommendation by the Planning Commission the City Council will receive a strikethrough version with a copy of the matrix as it has evolved from Mr. Kisielius. The Commission discussed and decided to amend the policy to put the word community. SMP 1.4 Public Interest and Property Rights - Balance the interests of the community in attaining the goals of the Shoreline Master Program, in a manner consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations on the regulation of private property Commissioner Carroll stated he has listened to recording from the previous meeting. Mr. Carroll shared he felt there should be a higher standard for public projects and public employees than for private development, which is why he advocated to change Policy Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 2 of 7 5.12. Ms. Barlow stated not only had Policy 5.12 been changed to reflect this opinion but also Policy 4.1 L Mr. Carroll said he felt if we did not set high goals then the City would never achieve the desired result. Chair Bates stated at this time we have covered all of the polices and should now take the recommendation of staff. Commissioner Hall pointed out there was a formatting issue on Policy 7.4. Chair Bates reminded the Commission there was a standing motion on the floor. The current motion is to recommend approval of the SAG draft Goals and Policies to the City Council. The Chair then called for the vote. The vote on the motion to 0 in favor, 5 against. Motion fails. Commissioner Hall made a motion that the Ciry Council accept the Draft Goals and Policies for the Shoreline Master Program as they have been amended in the Planning Commission Draft Goals and Policies on June 28, 2012. The vote on this motion is 5 in favor and 0 against. Motion passes. ii. Continued discussion proposed changes to Planning Commission Rules of Procedure: City Attorney Cary Driskell, discussing the reason for the proposed changes which were adding a code of ethics section and how the Commission would handle absences. Some technical clean up has been done as well. Mr. Driskell stated one of the issues which the Commission asked to discuss again was Section 13(D)(3) Missing three or more consecutive regularly scheduled meetings or study sessions, or missing six meetings in a 12 month period (whether consecutive or not) without such absences being excused by the Commission. The discussion is to remove the part of"or six meetings in a 12 month period" to make the policy consistent with the code. There was discussion among the Commissioners of removing or leaving in this language. Mr. Driskell stated it would be in conflict with the Municipal Code to leave it in. Chair Bates said this was not a requirement of the Ciry Council. In order to leave this language in, a request to change the Municipal Code would need to be made to the City Council. Commissioner Bates asked if it should be one or the other. Mr. Driskell answered that would be the easiest, and it would be simpler to remain in compliance with city code. It is the same code which the city council has for itself and has adopted for the Planning Commission. Mr. Bates stated it seemed to be what most municipalities seem to also have, in the research he did. Commissioner Hall asked why it would need to be changed. � Missing three or more consecutive regularly scheduled meetings or study sessions,—e� without such absences being excused by the Commission. Commissioner Hall asked if(the above) is how it would read, when changed. The City Attorney answered yes. Commissioners Carroll and Bates were confused regarding an absence If there is an objection, the Presiding Officer shall call for a motion to excuse the member. What would Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 3 of 7 happen if no one made a motion. Mr. Driskell and the Commission agreed there would need to be a re-write in order for it to make more sense. Mr. Driskell will bring it back. Commissioner Higgins stated he did not feel the wording in Section 13(C)(2) states if the member feels disqualified....He shared he did not think "feels" was the right phrasing. Mr Driskell responded he would look at the statement however it is a personal analysis if they believe they can be unbiased. Commissioner Carroll stated Section 9(A) Any person who fails to sign in shall not be permitted to speak until all those who signed in have done so. Mr Carroll state he felt that this takes away the Chair's ability to control the meeting. Planning Manager Kuhta pointed out this it is the way the Commission runs the meeting. The people who have signed in are allowed to speak first and then anyone else is allowed to speak afterwards. Mr. Driskell stated he would return with the requested changes. B. New Business: Study Session: CTA-02-12 Proposed Amendments to 19120 Permitted Use Matrix. At this time Mike King stated he had missed the public comment portion of the meeting and asked to speak Chair Bates conferred with the Commission members and granted Mr. King the opportunity to speak Mr. King stepped to the podium, handed the secretary a letter to distribute. Mr. King started speaking regarding aslcing to allow office uses in a the MF-2 zoning district. Since a study session on this subject was the next agenda item, the Chair stopped Mr. King and informed him he would be unable to continue since the subject he was speaking to was on the agenda, however he could return and deliver his information at the public hearing which had been noticed for July 12, 2012. Mr. King apologized and stated he would return at that time. Assistant Planner Christina Janssen began her presentation on file number CTA-2012- 0002. Ms Janssen stated the Ciry Council had asked staff to review the uses allowed in the Corridor Mixed Use and Garden Office zones. As well as staff had discovered some general housekeeping issues which are being corrected at this time and for ease of use all manufacturing items are being moved from the alphabetical listing to a heading of manufacturing, then individual headings to make the matrix more user friendly for the staff. Commissioner Bates stated he could understand why the City would review a large zoning district like Corridor Mixed Use, however, why would the City review such a small zoning district like Garden Office. Ms. Janssen, with support of Mr. Kuhta, stated the City Council supplied the direction on the review of the uses in this zoning district. Some of the concerns were uses which were not allowed by matrix which seemed to make sense. Ms. Janssen showed the legend at the top of the matrix which shows all of the zoning districts. Ms Janssen also shared the key which explains the symbols in the chart, P = Permitted, R = Regional Siting, S = Conditions Apply, A = Accessory Use only, T = requires a Temporary Use Permit, C —requires a Conditional Use Permit. Ms Janssen shared the changes proposed are: • City Center: Remove the category of"City Center" as there is no longer any land within the City zoned City Center. Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 4 of 7 • Appliance sales/service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Community Commercial zone. The size and scale of typical appliance stores is compatible with the Community Commercial zone. • Auction House: Proposed as an allowed use in the Light Industrial zone due the availability of structures large enough to accommodate this type of business. • Manufacturing: Relocate all manufacturing categories from their current alphabetic location in the code to a general "Manufacturing" section within the code for easier navigation. No changes are being proposed to the locations where these uses can locate within the City. • Automobile/truck/RV/motorcycle painting, repair, body and fender works: Proposed as an allowed use with conditions in the Community Commercial zone. An appropriate use in this zone provided that it be located within an enclosed structure. • Barber/beauty shop: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office zone as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. • Bicycle sales/service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Of�ce zone as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. • Boat sales/service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Corridor Mixed Use and Light Industrial zones where other automobile sales are currently allowed. • Brewery, micro: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. A growing trend, these small tap breweries typically serve the neighborhoods where they are located. • Building Supply & Home Improvement: The Corridor Mixed Use zones have significant vacancies and would be appropriate for this type of use. Other uses already permitted in the CMU zone with a similar NAICS classification include hardware stores and greenhouse/garden centers. • Candy & Confectionary: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office and Of�ce zones as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to fhe adj acent residential uses. • Cemetery and crematories: Proposing that these uses be separated and that crematories be contemplated separately due to potential issues with crematories in residential aones. Proposing crematories as an allowed use in the Community Commercial, Regional Commercial, Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial zones. Commissioner Carroll questioned where funeral homes were allowed. He also asked what if funeral home has a crematory? Mr. Carroll would like to link funeral homes, crematoriums and cemeteries together. Staff stated they will return with more information. • Church, temple, mosque, synagogue and parsonage: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Of�ce zone. Small congregations are regularly locating in spaces which were formally small retail or office spaces. These uses are allowed in all other zones within the City with the exception of the industrial zones. • Clothes, retail sales: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Smaller,boutique type establishments appropriate to serve the surrounding neighborhood. • Drug Store: A dated term, proposing to rename this item "Pharmacy", a more widely used term and relocate it alphabetically within the code. Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 5 of 7 • Dwelling, townhouse: Proposing to remove this from the Neighborhood Commercial zone where residential uses are not allowed. This change corrects an error in the code. • Entertainment/recreation facilities, indoor: Proposed as a permitted use in the Light Industrial zone and with a Conditional Use Permit in the Heavy Industrial zone. These uses, which include indoor soccer centers, batting cages, etc. are growing in popularity and typically locate in large, warehouse type facilities commonly found in industrial areas. • Essential Public Facilities: Proposed as Regional Siting in the Corridor Mixed Use zone. This amendment would make it possible for the County to consider parcels zoned CMU when contemplating uses including, but not limited to, hospitals, regional transportation facilities, inpatient facilities, etc. Planning Manager Kuhta explained the process to of siting a Essential Public Facility to the Commission to answer their questions regarding this proposal. • Exercise facility/gym/athletic club: Proposed as an allowed use in the Office zone. Small scale �tness facilities that locate in strip commercial or office space such as Curves, Anytime Fitness, or the like. These smaller facilities do not generate traffic or noise beyond what would typically be expected in the Office zone. • Hobby Shop: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Of�ce and Office zones as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. • Home furnishings, retail sales: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. These smaller,boutique style stores serve the neighborhoods where they are located. • Market, outdoor: Proposing to change this use from requiring a Temporary Use Permit to an outright permitted use in the Mixed Use Center, Corridor Mixed Use, Community Commercial, Regional Commercial, Parks and Open Space, and Light Industrial zones. Outdoor markets are growing in popularity and often are functional for longer than the 6 months the Temporary Use Permit currently allows. • Mobile food vendors: Allowed with conditions in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. These small businesses, which serve the neighborhood where they are located, would need the permission of the property owner and the Health Department. • Music store: Proposed as an accessory use in the Garden Office zone as this would be compatible with specialized training, such as a music school. • Office & Computer sales: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Smaller,neighborhood scale businesses as opposed to "big box" office retail(Office Depot). • Photographic Studio: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office and Office zones as these businesses are typically smaller in size and do not generate traffic or noise in amounts that would be disruptive to the adjacent residential uses. • Print Shop: Proposed as an allowed use in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Small scale businesses serving the neighborhoods where they are located. • Radio/TV broadcasting studio: Proposed as an allowed use in the Light Industrial zone due to the large equipment required for this type of business. • Recreational vehicle sales and service: Proposed as an allowed use in the Corridor Mixed Use zone where other types of automobile sales are currently allowed. Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 6 of 7 • Specialized training/learning schools or studios: Proposed as an allowed use in the Garden Office zone, these types of businesses which can include dance, martial arts, music, or other similar uses do not generally produce traffic or noise which would be harmful to nearby neighborhoods. • Taxidermy: Proposed as an allowed use in the Corridor Mixed Use zone. Ta�dermy is a low intensity use generating low traffic volumes. Commissioner Bates asked why medical sales, medical/ dental/hospital equipment supply/sales are not allowed in the Garden Office zone but are allowed in Office Zone. Planning Manager Kuhta explained the uses are considered a bit more intense and most dental and medical offices are allowed in the Office zone. Garden Office is a transition zone between higher intense uses of Office and Single Family Residential. Commissioner Bates asked if there had been any discussion of combining the Office and Garden Office zones. Mr. Kuhta explained although there is little Garden Office zones in the City, they do provide a transition for the single family residential areas they are protecting. Commissioner Carroll asked if the NAICS codes were still used in the Use Matrix and Mr. Kuhta shared yes, and explained how the Census codes worked and how staff uses them to assist in making determinations for unlisted uses. Commissioner Hall stated he was having issues with the indoor entertainment facilities in the heavy industrial zones. Mr. Hall reminded the Commissioners that if they have questions about some of the uses they can refer to the definitions in order to make an informed decision. Ms. Janssen asked the Commissioners if there was anything else they felt she needed to look into to regarding changes to the matrix. Mr. Kuhta stated the Commissioners should look at the zoning district definitions and then look at the proposed uses in making suggestions to uses in the zones. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER There was nothing for the good of the order. XL ADJOURNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 7:39 p.m. � � Bill Bates, Chairperson Deanna Griffith, PC Secretary Planning Commission Minutes 06-28-2012 Page 7 of 7